Leaders

[Sneaks]

Hmm, actually I really like the Men of the Pen idea.

However, that makes me think perhaps removing the Great General portion of the UA would be smart, and within the realms of current Trait capability.

 

[Thalassicus]

I agree ships of the line can be useful, but I also agree with Ahriman that England already has a fantastic naval advantage with the +2 movement speed, which is especially a huge bonus to embarked movement. I do enjoy playing them as a naval civ.

Ironclads and Frigates actually have the same movement speed with the Combat mod. (The difference is Ironclads are 130%, 115%, 140%, no oceans, much later tech. I've been thinking about making them equally cost-effective as frigates.)

In the current build I find navies aren't that useful, because they don't do enough damage to cities

All ships with some form of decent naval artillery (Frigates onwards) start with the Demolish promotion for +100% vs cities, same as their landlubber counterparts. Naval cannon are still slightly weaker than army cannon and can't be used against targets deep inland, but the effectiveness of the two are very close, so they should be useful in assaulting ports.

While it's technically possible to make a trait only improve non-GG great people, it would require +33.33% GreatPeopleRateModifier and -24.98% GreatGeneralRateModifier, which would be somewhat cumbersome and have weird interaction with other modifiers. I like the flexibility of the Ottoman's trait equally benefiting peaceful and militaristic goals, as it gives the player more options and fits Ottoman history.

Since there's so much reaction to the Dominion name though, I'll go with the more neutral option. And I really liked the sound of it! Oh well.

 

[Polycrates]

I agree ships of the line can be useful, but I also agree with Ahriman that England already has a fantastic naval advantage with the +2 movement speed, which is especially a huge bonus to embarked movement. I do enjoy playing them as a naval civ.

I really think the idea of a naval UU is just fun and interesting - and I think the frigate is the only unit that really makes sense for it. Is your objection that the combination is too powerful, too redundant or just too one-dimensional?
And the English trait is more about the logistical ability to acquire and maintain a spread-out empire, the SotL more to actually dominate the seas and coasts. And if there's one thing that really defined English power, it was the power of its navy in the frigates-through-ironclads period. Trafalgar alone was the most devastating pantsing any first-rate fleet has ever received in open battle; and post-Trafalgar, English naval supremacy was unquestioned for a century and the mere threat of it let them dominate the world stage right through the Victorian era.

Ironclads and Frigates actually have the same movement speed with the Combat mod. (The difference is Ironclads are 130%, 115%, 140%, no oceans, much later tech. I've been thinking about making them equally cost-effective as frigates.)

I really meant more the English frigates' greater speed vs other civs' ironclads - so combined with the closer strength they can still put up a fight. But yeah ironclads really do feel like they need a buff anyway.

 

[Thalassicus]

I love the concept of naval warfare and researched a lot about naval history over the years. Some of the modding I tried to do for Civ IV was navy-related. The problems are just 1) how naval UUs work in the civilization series, and 2) England's success influenced more than others by pre-game factors like map choice and terrain generation luck.


1) How naval UUs work in the civilization series.

These units have always felt like support, not the primary force of an army. They cannot capture, create, or develop cities, don't benefit from things like terrain bonuses or great generals, have limited promotion capability, no buildings to increase their base experience (in V), and so on.

In particular, naval warfare is not especially thrilling in CiV because of the limited number of pre-Modern ship classes. Against opponents of around the same tech level, SotL's will only ever face one unit type - Frigates.


2) England's success influenced more than others by pre-game factors.
Similar to Japan, I want to give England more flexibility. I feel the Steam Mill provides the player with more options than a unit designed for warmongers to gain dominance of a single non-land domain (similar to Japan).

I also went with military-oriented ideas for Japan at first (courthouse, castle, etc), but over the span of weeks of discussion with everyone on the topic (in the Combined thread I believe), I was gradually convinced it's a good idea to provide Japan with more options. The Shrine gives Japan bonus , border expansion, and policies, all of which are useful to some extent for warmongers. Since the goal of these mods is to increase the number of valuable options available to players, it seems reasonable to go with choices that provide more flexibility.

Similarly, I've been trying to pursue ideas the reduce a player's dependency on map-generation luck. Civs with bonuses that rely on a particular sort of terrain (water, forests, etc) will have success or failure rely more on chance (or choice of map type) than other civs, factors that occur before the game begins rather than decisions made throughout the game.

This is where it really just comes down to personal preference.

Some people like games of luck! The gambling industry is based on that, after all. Others like games with less luck involved, like chess. As a matter of my own personal preference, I prefer shifting CiV from luck-based to skill-based, which is why I love CiV's choice-driven great person generation, and am also hesitant to implement a water-restricted UB.

England does still retain the most powerful navy with +2. This doubles early embarkation speed, making sea a faster method of transport than land for all unit classes. Their Frigates also move +40% faster, so they still have an advantage over other civs' Frigates. I feel this keeps England's dominance of the seas, and the Steam Mill provides more power for land, sea, air, and building construction.

 

[Ahriman]

Suggestion: since Ottomans no longer have a naval ability, why not remove their start position flavor that has them start on coasts?

 

[Thalassicus]

Good point! I've done so.

On a similar note... America's trait is called TRAIT_RIVER_EXPANSION and used attribute FasterAlongRiver at some point. These obviously have nothing to do with the trait as it exists in the release version of CiV, and must have been from an earlier stage in development. Do you think this indicates its river start bias is an unintentional leftover from past versions, or do you think it's a purposeful buff to the civ? It's hard to know the developer's intentions here...

More importantly I guess, does it make sense? Most of these civs' first cities started along rivers... I've always been puzzled why the US has a start emphasis in that manner.

 

[Ahriman]

My guess is some old version of their ability?
It does seem out of place.

 

[Sneaks]

It was certainly an older ability, given that there also is a trait capacity to increase yields along rivers.

 

[Ahriman]

With the strategic resource changes, Russia is really powerful now.
Can we change its ability to give +50% instead of +100%?

 

[Txurce]

With the strategic resource changes, Russia is really powerful now.
Can we change its ability to give +50% instead of +100%?

I think I know what you mean - that the new 2-yield resource tiles give it a big boost. But in deciding whether or not they're OP, let's review the vanilla version. Russia was considered average, with a good UB and a sub-par UU. In this version - that is, the feast or famine version - Russia almost always found itself near iron and/or horses. From that perspective, couldn't it be argued that Russia has been nerfed at least as much as the other civs? Even if you disagree with this, is their mod-based improvement enough to catapult them above the top tier? If not, I'd think any actual buff to Russia would be a good thing, from the "more fun to play" perspective.

 

[Thalassicus]

Basically what Ahriman's pointing out is that since strategics used to be nearly-unlimited for everyone and now that applies only to Catherine, she got a relative buff. However:

The border expansion modifier currently only works on a global level so don't bother using the xml value, you're like to break things (and yes, this means the Krepost is bugged).

This Krepost bug is why I left her alone. Even if that's working though, I mostly agree with what Txurce said. I suspect that since she wasn't particularly high-rated beforehand (and her UU got whacked in the global mounted unit nerf), my thinking is it probably just brings her up to par.

 

[Ahriman]

I think I know what you mean - that the new 2-yield resource tiles give it a big boost.

No, what I mean is that now strategic resource constraints actually bind.
In vanilla, Russia was mediocre because extra iron, horses and uranium was not that powerful, because you already had more than you need.

Now that these resources actually *are* powerful, Russia is up there as possibly the best civ in the game, especially since there are now also more small horse and iron tiles, which each give the hammer bonus.

From that perspective, couldn't it be argued that Russia has been nerfed at least as much as the other civs?

No, Russia was *boosted* because its power became relatively more important. 12 horses vs 6 is unimportant, but 4 horses vs 2 is very important indeed.

is their mod-based improvement enough to catapult them above the top tier?

Yes, I think so. Everyone else is building armies of mostly pikes and catapults, I can build an army entirely of longswords knights and catapults.

Krepost definitely seems to be working for me, my border expansion is fast.

 

[Txurce]

In vanilla, Russia was mediocre because extra iron, horses and uranium was not that powerful, because you already had more than you need...

No, Russia was *boosted* because its power became relatively more important. 12 horses vs 6 is unimportant, but 4 horses vs 2 is very important indeed.

My thinking was based on our modding vanilla because of strategic resource imbalance (feast or famine) as well as a SR surfeit in terms of balancing the game's resourceless units. Given my understanding that Russia's vanilla starts were weighted toward being SR-heavy (as well as terrain-poor), it seemed that they already had a big SR edge - not so much from the 12 vs 6 pov, but from 12 v 0. That's why I wasn't so sure that this buff knocked them into the stratosphere. But I'll try them next and see.

 

[Ahriman]

I do not think Russia are any more or less likely to start near strategic resources than any other civ. I do not believe there are SR weights built into the flavor starts; they're solely terrain.
Russia is likely to start in plains, but AFAIK plains are no more or less likely to have horses than grasslands.

"Feast or famine" was only a big deal in vanilla post-patch for iron, and because of how crucial iron was to expansion.
But the main impact of the resource changes I think is the overall reduction, in order to give them scarcity value. When they had no scarcity value, Russia's ability wasn't that great. Now that they do have scarcity value, Russia's ability is much more powerful.

Basically, it feels to me like Russia is where a normal civ was in vanilla in terms of average number of resources; unconstrained, and able to build what they like. And the more-smaller-nodes just means that Russia will be unconstrained in iron/horses nearly every game.
Even with each node giving 3 rather than 2, it will still be a powerful ability.

They also got a nice boost with the patch; allowing Cossacks to upgrade into tanks is a very big buff. Cossacks used to be a weak UU; they were end of an upgrade line, on a mediocre unit. Now, they let you get superior tanks; your artillery can remain useful vs high strength units to do a touch of damage and let the superior tanks kill stuff much more easily.

 

[Thalassicus]

With a near-universal deposit size of 2, it wasn't possible to increase the number of deposits while also achieving the goal of an overall reduction in total strategic resource availability. The increase in # of deposits was in the 1s/3s size version since we could have more fine-tune control over the quantity of 1-size deposits. I know all the experimentation and changes in the beta have been impossible to follow along with, sorry!

Hopefully now that things are settling down some it'll be easier to get a sense of how things play out. Explaining a few more hings:

• Russia's start bias is Tundra.
• This tends to start her near more plains since that's common near tundra, but it's not assured.
• Plains and grassland generate more horses than other terrain types.
• Tundra and snow generate much more iron, oil, and aluminum.

These four points are unchanged from vanilla.

Something to keep in mind is 3→4 is a bigger % increase than 4→5, and this mod increases yields of mines / horses. Sort of like how her strategic-doubling is more valuable in relation to other civs, the production bonus is less valuable.

• UU nerfed against cities, buffed in upgrades (probably a net neutral when combined, since modern-era boosts have lower value)
• Production bonus less valuable
• Resource bonus much more valuable

Since she was underpowered beforehand, I feel an overall net buff is justified. Even with the cavalry->tank upgrade path (added about a month before the patch), I still felt Catherine was weak in the games I tried with her. I'm going to keep her settings for a while until we have a chance to playtest Russia thoroughly.

 

[Ahriman]

Well, I tend to think that in any game where +100% iron, horses and uranium is weak, that is just evidence that we don't have strategic resources right yet.

But I'm finding it pretty strong. You can build 4 swordsmen with a single iron deposit. That's a big deal when everyone else can only get 2.

 

[Txurce]

I just finished a game as Russia on Immortal with v25, WWGD and FR. I purposely played the way I always play, and wound up with similar results. Russia had a military resource edge, and a terrain deficit that kept pop low. Results aside, I would say that Russia felt stronger, but not dramatically so.

I'll add more comments in the Diplomacy, City Improvements and Combined mods.

 

[Ahriman]

Why did you have a terrain deficit? Do you just mean their start position?
Build lots of river-plains farms, its easy to get decent pop.
What mapscript? I find start positions vary a lot based on mapscript and particular start.
I don't find Russian starts particularly bad.
In fact, I find plains starts still generally superior to grassland starts, particularly with golden ages.

 

[Txurce]

Why did you have a terrain deficit? Do you just mean their start position?
Build lots of river-plains farms, its easy to get decent pop.
What mapscript? I find start positions vary a lot based on mapscript and particular start.
I don't find Russian starts particularly bad.
In fact, I find plains starts still generally superior to grassland starts, particularly with golden ages.

Yes, I mean their start position. There's usually some tundra, hills and plains. If you're not planning on a major expansion - 4 cities in my case, with 3 added later to fill in gaps and a seventh annexed - it's hard to get big pop. I tend to build farms to excess, and wound up with six Maritimes that I kept all game (four after a late Astronomy). My final pop was skewed because I went heavy on specialists, but the early growth left me way, way behind the others.

But the basic point was that Russian starts aren't usually good, and the resource buff isn't game-transforming.

 

[Thalassicus]

So in the progression of Firaxis's attempts to fix bugs...

In release CiV:

• Krepost worked properly.
• Angkor Wat reduced border expansion cost by -75% in city it's built in, but tooltip stated otherwise. I corrected the tooltip in the unofficial patch.

In a patch, they changed in c++ how PlotCultureCostModifier attribute works, shared by both buildings. So now we're at:

• Krepost is a world wonder reducing border costs -50% in all cities, two stacking to -85%.
• Angkor Wat matches its tooltip.

Classic example of fixing a bug in one location causing more serious bugs in another!